The Lords Day Vindicated, Tract · Section 14
SECT. XIV.
HE next propoſes, Page 58. the Objection againſt his Sabbath, and Argument for our Lords day, which is in 1 Cor. 16.1, 2. which is taken (as we ſay) from the Collections for the Poor made in the publick Congregations on the firſt day of the Week, and does what he can to enervate it: Let us ſee how ſucceſsfully.
1. He tells us he knows not what the order to the Church of Galatia was: But St. Paul tells him plainly, that in this particular it was to collect Mony for the Poor on the Lords-day. 2. That he does not find written, that this order to that Church ſhould oblige all others. The like may be ſaid of all the other Orders and Directions given in Scripture, to all particular Churches therein mentioned and written to: For 'tis not there ſaid, that they are intended for all other Churches to the end of the World: Yet I hope he looks upon the Doctrins taught them, the Ordinance and Diſcipline eſtabliſhed amongſt them, to be Obligatory upon the Churches now. And we may well ſuppoſe, the Apoſtles being inſpired by the Holy Ghoſt in theſe Matters, in all their Conſtitutions of their prime Primitive Churches, to lay the Platform for all ſucceeding ones; except there may be ſome particular Circumſtance which may neceſſitate or allow a Deviation therefrom; which in this matter of Collection cannot well be pretended. 3. That it was a general order for a charitable Sepoſition, but no order to obſerve the firſt day: True indeed, but it does imply the Obſervance of that day, elſe why ſhould it be enjoyned on that day more than on another, but becauſe thereon publick Aſſemblies met? 4. 'Tis an Order, he tells us, for a profane Employment, as to caſt up their Accounts on that day, and to tell their Mony they have got, and to reckon up how much their Stock is increaſed; for he here ſuppoſes a Man muſt on this day look over all his Stock, caſt up all his Charges, &c. But certainly this is a pretty far fetch'd Invention, for they are commanded only to lay up by them on the Lords-day, what God had graciouſly enabled them to give to the Poor, by his Succeſs on their Labours, and his providential Bleſſing on them, as to Earthly things; which they might very well enquire into the day before, even the Seventh; and having then diſcovered how God had ſucceeded them, the next day, even the Lords-day, to ſeparate that charitable Portion from the reſt, and carry it unto the publick Aſſembly, and ſo caſt it into the Poors Box. And I think 'tis clear, that the Text neceſſarily implies a former Inquiſition into their Stock, before this Sepoſition; but where it implies it muſt be done on that day, no Man can ſee. Wherefore we ſay, that a former Examination being had of theſe Matters, this day that conſecrated part was taken, carried to the Congregation, and put into the common Stock; that ſo the Apoſtle, when he came amongſt them, might not be forced to go from Houſe to Houſe to gather, but find it all ready in the publick Eccleſiaſtical Treaſure. I am ſure he can bring no Demonſtration from the Text for his, or againſt my Interpretation: But then I have the Teſtimony of the moſt ancient Fathers, that on the firſt day they publickly aſſembled; and then they made Collection for the Poor in theſe Aſſemblies. Moreover, If the Apoſtle here enjoyned ſuch a profane or worldly Task as he ſuppoſes; why does he enjoyn them to do it on the Firſt days, ſeeing it might have been done as well n every day of the Week, and better on the Sixth day? If the Seventh were then their Sabbath, that ſo they might know, at the end of the common days, what they might well and gratefully ſpare of that weeks Gains, and ſo lay it up againſt the enſuing Sabbath for the Poors Stock. Whence we ſee that this ſuppoſed Solution to this Argument, has no ground at all from the Text, and to be ſure from no other Topick: And therefore conclude, that the General Collections, and ſo Aſſociations of the Galatian Church, being on the Firſt day; And the Appoſtle commanding the Church of Corinth to make the ſame Collections on that day in Imitation of them, or as they did; is, with the former, a very good Evidence, that that day was the inſtituted day for Worſhip, and ſo conſequently the Seventh excluded.
Page 60. That Proof for the Firſt-day-Sabbath in Rev. 1.9, 10. where that day which St. John calls the Lords-day, we ſay was that day of the week, which we will by no means grant; but tells us what the Opinions of ſome ſingular Perſons were concerning it; that it was Annual, not a weekly day; either the day of Chriſt's Birth, or of his Reſurrection; either Chriſtmas-day or Eaſter: Others ſay 'tis a great providential day to vindicate his Kingly Authority; and others, the laſt day of his coming; but how this day, whereon St. John was in the Spirit, ſhould be a future day, can hardly be conjectured; but every thing muſt be hinted, that may ſeem to ſerve to an Undermining of the Firſt day of the week from being the day of this glorious Viſion. But at length it is granted, that ſome take this Lords-day to be a weekly day: But then again theſe ſome are crumbled into a Sub-diviſion, and ſome of them aſſert it to be the Firſt day, and ſome the Seventh day thereof; and this is written, as though the Aſſertors of the Firſt day were as ſmall a ſome, as thoſe of the former annual Opinion, of a future day to John's Viſion, and of the laſt day of the Week: Whereas I dare to ſay, put them all together, they will not amount to the hundredth part of thoſe ſolid and learned Authors, which underſtand it of the Firſt day of the week; but withall theſe ſome for the Seventh day, as inconſiderable for number as they are, in compariſon of the other, yet they are far better founded, and proceed upon more certain and undeniable Grounds than the Firſt-day-Men do; for they proceed upon Scripture, but theſe have only Tradition, if they have that for their Opinion. Now the Tradition which is pleaded for the Firſt day to be the Lords-day, is conſtant, uninterrupted, and univerſal, from the days of the Apoſtles: The Generality of Chriſtians acknowledging the Dominical day to be the Firſt day, whatever Opinion they had of the Sabbath; till of late Years, ſome Sabbatarians have thought fit to queſtion it, and virtually (if not expreſly) to deny it. Which is ſuch a Tradition, as upon which their very Scriptural Proofs are grounded; for 'tis from Tradition that they know the meaning of the very words of the Scripture. Whether the Original Languages carry the Senſe they are interpreted in; and whether we have the genuine and proper Significations of the Originals, can be known by nothing but Humane Tradition; for either it muſt be had from Tranſlations, or Lexicons, or oral Traditions: Wherefore if the Sabbatarians will renounce here ſuch a Tradition as is pleaded; they muſt withall renounce their own Scriptural Authority, which courſe will make wild work in the Church.
He very well denies it to be Chriſtmas-day, or any annual one; but the great Query is, What day of the Week this was; and here in the entrance of his Diſcourſe, he endeavours to invalidate the univerſal Tradition of the Churches for 1600 Years, by an Induction of other unlawful Traditions; as that of Polygamy among the Patriarchs; of whom the Scripture mentions but a few particulars; and what is that to the Univerſality of Chriſtians? And which was condemned by our Saviour as alien from the firſt Inſtitution of Marriage: And how does this reſemble the Firſt days being the Lords-day, which was never blamed by him? The like he mentions in the Omiſſion of the Feaſt of Booths; and the Cuſtom of the Profanation of the Seventh-days-Sabbath before the Captivity: But theſe were againſt expreſs Injunctions and Commands, ſtill in force and obliging; which we deny the Seventh-day-Sabbath to be; and avouch, and may yet more prove its Abolition, as of other poſitive and ceremonial Commands, without any expreſs or literal Prohibition of them in Scripture. What therefore he ſaith, in the following Paragraph, would be very cogent and undeniable; If he could prove the Seventh day of the week to be ſtill enjoyned by the Fourth Command, which he hath not yet done by his poſitive Proofs for his own Opinion, (as we have ſeen) nor by his Negative, in denying of ours, (as has been in ſome meaſure ſeen already, and may be more hereafter.) At length he comes to give us his own Judgment concerning this Lords-day, what day of the Week it was; and if he had not told us, we ſhould have preſumed that it determined for the Seventh-day, (which in all things till the end of the World muſt have the Preheminence according to his thoughts) but withall 'tis grounded upon Scripture, which we will candidly and fairly weigh and examine. 1. That the Lord Chriſt inſtituted the Seventh-day-Sabbath juſt after the Creation, he means too before the Fall, quoting Gen. 1. begin. which we utterly deny, becauſe Jeſus Chriſt then was not, nor could be, (we ſpeak of his Exiſtence, not Gods Foreſight and Decree) for then Man was Guiltleſs and Sinleſs, and ſo needed no Jeſus, nor could have had one: But in all theſe Old Teſtament Proofs he runs upon that former Fallacy of Ill Compoſition; taking for granted that whatever Jehovah did, the Lord Jeſus Chriſt did. Jehovah, the Godhead of our Saviour, did create and inſtitute the Seventh-day-Sabbath, but not Chriſt himſelf; which neceſſarily includes both the Godhead and the Manhood: And therefore the Premiſes being falſe, the Concluſion cannot be true; nor the conſequential Diſcourſe thereupon of any Moment. His ſecond and third Arguments laboring under the ſame Miſtake, admit of the ſame Anſwer: Beſides, we know that the poſitive and ceremonial Precepts of Jehovah before his Incarnation, were to be aboliſhed by himſelf after his Incarnation, that is, by our Lord Jeſus; and others more Eaſie, Clear and Effectual, introduced in their room, (whereof we aſſert the Seventh-day-Sabbath to be, which he can never prove to be Moral, and ſo was to be excluded with them) and a new Time, as well as new Rites, inſtituted by the King of the Church.
His next Argument to prove his Aſſertion, is from thoſe Paſſages, wherein 'tis ſaid, The Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath-day, Matt. 12.8. Mark 2.28. Luke 6.5. A Proof which we make uſe of to prove our Doctrin of the First-day-Sabbath, and he thinks makes clearly and ſtrongly for his. Though there may be ſome ground for the Opinion of ordinary Men, being meant by the Son of Man in theſe Texts; becauſe 'tis the Appellation which the Holy Ghoſt uſually gives them, calling them Sons of Men; and when he ſpeaks to Ezekiel particularly, his uſual Expreſſion is Son of Man: And St. Mark relating the ſame Hiſtory, of the Diſciples gathering Ears of Corn on the Sabbath-day; and the Phariſees being ſcandalized thereat, and complaining to our Lord Chriſt that they did that which was not Lawful; as the occaſion of this ſaying of our Lord Jeſus (which the other Evangeliſts relate alſo, and no other occaſion of it is recorded in them, neither do we find that he uſed it at any other time) ſeems to carry it in this Senſe; for he ſaith Mark 2.27, 28. that Chriſt ſaid unto theſe Cenſurers, The Sabbath was made for Man, and not Man for the Sabbath: And then immediately adds this Sentence with an Illative, Therefore the Son of Man is Lord alſo of the Sabbath. I ſuppoſe no Man will deny but that the firſt Verſe is meant of ordinary (I mean) meer, Men; for 'tis brought by our Lord Chriſt as a Vindication of his Diſciples action, who were meer Men; and not of any one of his own, who was God as well as Man. Withall I believe that we cannot find in all the Scripture, that appellative Man, thus abſtractly and abſolutely uſed, without any diſtinction or Limitation, antecedent or conſequent to it; underſtood of any but of meer Men, which being granted the Illative therefore, ſeems to carry the next Sentence for the ſame Subject, and to declare that Man, common Man, is Lord of the Sabbath; not an authoritative Lord to diſpoſe of it as he pleaſes, and do on it as he liſts; but ſo far a Lord, as to be the end of the Sabbath; for whoſe Profit and Comfort it was ordained. As a Son may be ſaid to be Lord of that Houſe that is built for him; and in which he dwells and uſes for his Convenience and Delight; though his Father obliges him not to ſell or alienate it; and the Laws of the Land not to burn it.
Though therefore this Interpretation of the Son of Man be no way Heterodox, nor any way ſtrained, from this Text; neither do we by this Interpretation, give a meer Man a Lordſhip over the Moral Law, as he ſuppoſes, (for his taking for granted, that the Laſt-day-Sabbath is Moral; I look upon as his Fundamental Error; and the great cauſe of his Miſtaken Confidence in all this Diſcourſe:) We ſay that in no reſpect Man is Lord over any of the Moral Law; not in this that we ſpeak of; for Man was made for the Moral Law, that is, to perform all the Duties thereof; but now Man is Lord over the Sabbath (as our Lord avouches) in this reſpect, viz. That the Sabbath was made for him, and therefore cannot be Moral, (as before,) But yet I ſay let it be granted, that 'tis ſpoken preciſely of our Lord Chriſt: Likewiſe we grant that the Sabbath ſpoken of in theſe Texts was the Seventh-day-Sabbath, and that our Lord Chriſt as the Son of Man, that is, ſuch a Son of Man as is alſo the Son of God; is Lord of the Sabbath; (we ſhould have obſerved before to evacuate all his Proofs drawn from the Old Teſtament, to prove the Seventh day of the Week to be the Lord's day here ſpoken of; that he, who is here called the Lord of the Sabbath, is ſaid to be the Son of Man, which he was not then.) Wherefore being ſuch an one, it cannot be denied but that he is an Abſolute Lord of the Sabbath, without Limitation; and ſo hath power to alter and change the day (which is no way Moral, I mean not the Seventh day at all) and ſo to make that to be lawful on the Seventh day, which before was not; even all ſorts of honeſt Imployments of our particular Callings, as well as charitable Actions; for when the day ceaſes to be Holy, and another advanced to that Honour by his Authority; then being a common day, common works are proper for it, which may ſeem to be the proper Intention of this Expreſſion to the Jews; for when they blamed him as a Tolerator of the Profanation of the Sabbath by his Diſciples, he takes a double Medium to refute their Slander; the one as a Doctor and Prophet of the Church; and ſo he teaches them, that that charitable Action of theirs toward their own Nature, was no Breach, but an allowed work of that day; and proves it by a Scriptural Preſident; and ſo vindicates his Diſciples Action from Sin: Wherefore ſuppoſing (as this Author does) that our Saviour had no other deſign but to vindicate his Diſciples, this had been abundantly enough, and he needed not to recur to his own Anthority over that day; which he does, and ſo uſes another Medium; as a Lord and King of the Church, and ſo of all the Inſtitutions, and particularly of the Seventh-day-Sabbath, (for which they were as Zealous as the Author, as neceſſary and permanent) and ſays he himſelf, is Lord of the Sabbath; and ſo had Authority to abrogate that day, or eſtabliſh it as he pleaſed; which ſeems to imply this much: You are ever and anon carping at my Diſciples, and eſpecially at me, as though their, and mine, Actions, were Profanations of the Sabbath: But I would have you to know, that I have a Sovereignty over it, and can diſpoſe of it as I pleaſe; and make things that are not Lawful on the Seventh to be Legitimate: Which we look upon as a hint of its Abrogation ſhortly after.
Eſpecially conſidering what Chriſt did, or cauſed to be done on that day in another place, viz. John 5.8. where having cured the impotent Man at the Pool of Betheſda, he commands him to riſe, to take up his Bed, and walk: Now we know that bearing of Burdens on the Sabbath day, is expreſly forbid, Jer. 17.21, 22, 24, 27. and there are Promiſes made unto them, that would obey that Command, and bear no Burdens; and Threats denounced againſt them that ſhould contradict it; ſerving to conſirm the Defence of bearing Burdens on that day. Accordingly Nebemiah was ſtrict in its Obſervance, Neh. 13.19. and the Jews themſelves were very nice in this particular, and very ſevere in their Puniſhment of ſuch Bearers, by Whipping and by Death, (as that great Hebraick Critick Dr. Lightfoot informs us.) Yet here our Lord expreſly commands the Healed Perſon to take up his Bed and walk, that is, to carry it either to his own Houſe, or to ſome other convenient place; for ſo he did in obedience to this Command, v. 10. Whereat the Jews were very highly offended, and condemned it as an unlawful Act, and ſought to perſecute and kill Chriſt for enjoyning of it, v. 16. Now we would enquire, to what end our Lord Chriſt did enjoyn this Perſon to carry ſuch a Burden on the Sabbath? If it be ſaid, it was to try his Faith and Obedience, or clearly to evince the Perfection of his miraculous Cure, or both of theſe: 'Tis replied, that theſe things could be as well done without the carriage of his Bed: He might have gone every where, and proclaimed his Cure, and his Reſtorer; he might have done it by leaping, dancing and praiſing God; as the Cripple in Acts 3. Wherefore 'tis probably apprehended by learned Men, that it was a practical Proof of his being Supream Lord of the Sabbath, and of his Authority to change the old day into another of his own appointment, and this was a real blow begun to be given to it.
Beſides all that was ſaid againſt theſe his Arguments for the Seventh day, to be the Lords day meant in the Revelation: 'Tis obſervable that the Greek word foreign is uſed but once more in the New Teſtament; and that is, 1 Cor. 11.20. where the Sacrament of our Saviours Body and Blood is called the Lords Supper; in which it is clear, it ſignifies both his Authoritative Inſtitution thereof, and that his own Death is ſignified thereby: The Lord is both the Inſtitutor thereof, and his Death the thing commemorated thereby: And therefore Reaſon, and comparing Scripture with Scripture, would require that it ſhould be ſo underſtood here alſo; even as a day of his own Inſtitution, as the Son of Man: For ſo he appeared to John to be in the Viſion. And ſo St. John calls him, Rev. 1.13. and ſo a day for his own Commemoration, even of his Reſurrection, viz. the Firſt day of the Week; which none deny to be that day. And 'twas on that day whereon the Author of the Revelations, ſaw the Lord Jeſus walking in the midſt of the Golden Candleſticks, with the Seven Stars in his Right Hand; that is, with his Orthodox and Zealous Miniſters, receiving their Light and Heat from him, the Sun of Righteouſneſs; And then diffuſing it abroad in the Churches, or in the midſt of the Congregations; which we know the Orthodox Fathers, throughout all Ages of the Church, have principally done upon the Firſt day of the Week, the day of the Reſurrection: And ſo the future Practice of the Church, proves the Lords day to be the Firſt day of the Week. Again, St. John calls this the Lords day, after his Reſurrection; and our Saviour tells him Verſe 18. I am he that liveth and was dead, and behold I live forevermore: Implying, that as after his Incarnation, Obedience, Death, Reſurrection, Aſcenſion, Seſſion on the Right Hand of God, and Miſſion of the Holy Ghoſt; all the former carnal and ceremonial Adminiſtrations vaniſhed, and a new Government, new external Modes of Worſhip, were introduced, which were properly the Lords and bear the Stamp of his Authority, as Mediator, as God-Man, over the Church and all her Ordinances: So this was alſo the Day of his own Inſtitution, after his Humiliation and Exaltation, for the Celebration of his new Inſtitutions; the other being excluded with the former Appendixes thereto. What follows under this Head, being what has been ſpoken to before, and is frequently inculcated (as of great Moment for him) as the Moral Law, as the now changing of the Sabbath; meer Pretences of the other party, &c. as being but a little better than the begging the Queſtion, and taking that for granted, which we utterly deny: Theſe I tacitly paſs by, and leave the Judicious Reader to judge, if after all has been ſaid, it be not far more probable that the Lords day, ſpoken of in the Revelations, is the Firſt day of the Week; (as all Schollars and Churches almoſt, have hitherto believed) than the Seventh day thereof, which a very few, ſcarce deſerving the Title of Number, have pitched upon, as a Prop to their tottering Seventh-day-Sabbath.